RE: [wsdm] MOWS Request Processing Digest Notification Act in Interop Scenario.

["Sedukhin, Igor S" <Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com>]

Mitsunori,

That is right it should be "Identity". I'll fix that.

Regarding the MOWS doc. The mows-events:ManageableEndpoint is the name
of the topic space. We've used that to differentiate as the WS-Topics
spec is not very clear as to what the name of the topic space should be
used for. Those path are only for documentation purposes, though. They
could not be used when subscribing because one MUST always refer to
normative definition of the topic space at the end of the document and
then pick a dialect to express it when subscribing. I would remove that
prefix in MOWS if we had set for a notation we'd use for topic paths
across the documents. I don't think we did, actually.

I noticed that all of the WSDM specifications do not describe the
notation used for notification topics. We do describe all other
notations used in the documents. I've also noticed that MUWS part 2
document does not have the section describing notations used in that
document. I believe the section should be there as it must describe the
notations used in that document. It is not reasonable to assume that
someone reading part 2 must always refer to part 1 to understand
notational conventions.

In general I believe we may want to consider the following fixes
(errata?)
 - add notational conventions to MUWS part 2
 - add definition of the topic path notation to the notational
conventions section of every document
 - explain which topic expression dialect is used in the spec document
itself


-- Igor Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11749

-----Original Message-----
From: Mitsunori Satomi [mailto:Mitsunori.Satomi@hds.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 10:30 PM
To: Sedukhin, Igor S; wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [wsdm] MOWS Request Processing Digest Notification Act in
Interop Scenario.

Igor,

As I mentioned at con call, I agreed with your following suggestion.

And I found the simple (editorial) miss description in interop scenario.
In "MUWS Identity/Characteristics Act" section,

> 2. Using the same EPR, retrieve muws-xs1:ManageabilityCharacteristics
property
>     an verify that [MUWS1] Identification capability URI is included
(possibly among others)

I think "[MUWS1] Identify capability" is correct. 


And I have a another question about the MOWS specification document
(cd-wsdm-mows-1.0.pdf).

As the event description of "5.2.6 Request Processing State",

> 1008
mows-events:ManageableEndpoint/mows-events:RequestProcessingObservations

I guess "mows-events:ManageableEndpoint/" is not necessary in this line.

----
Mitsunori SATOMI (mailto:Mitsunori.Satomi@hds.com)
  Director, Advanced Software Architect
    Hitachi Data Systems Corporation 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sedukhin, Igor S [mailto:Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 9:00 AM
> To: Mitsunori Satomi; wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [wsdm] MOWS Request Processing Digest Notification Act in

> Interop Scenario.
> 
> You're right, thanks Mitsunori. So there are  two ways to fiz this:
> 
> 	1) Make the subscription to
> mows-events:RequestProcessingObservations and keep the dialect simple.
> That way ANY notification regarding the request processing will be 
> sent.
> This is according to MOWS:
> [
> mows-events:RequestProcessingObservations indicates availability of 
> any information about the processing of any request by the Web service

> endpoint (Figure 12) as observed by the implementation of a manageable

> Web service.
> ]
> 
> 	2) Make the dialect a concrete topic expression.
> 
> Frankly either way is fine, I believe. 1) may even be simpler.
> 
> 
> -- Igor Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
> -- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11749
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mitsunori Satomi [mailto:Mitsunori.Satomi@hds.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 8:43 PM
> To: wsdm@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [wsdm] MOWS Request Processing Digest Notification Act in 
> Interop Scenario.
> 
> Hi, Igor and wsdm folks,
> 
> I and our engineer in Japan found a little problem in the Interop 
> Scenario document (wsdm 1.0 interop scenarios.doc).
> 
> In "MOWS Request Processing Digest Notification Act" section,
> 
>    2. Using the same EPR subscribe to the 
> mows-events:RequestProcessingObservations/Digest
>        topic using [BN] Subscribe operation. Indicate the topic and 
> [BN] Simple Topic Expression dialect.
>        Include an EPR to the receiver of the notification messages
> 
> in this case, consumer have to subscribe the child topic of 
> mows-events:RequestProcessingObservations.
> But using [BN] SimpleTopic Expression we can subscribe only the root 
> topic as describing in the WS-Topic specification.
> 
> ---- wsn-WS-Topics-1.2-draft-01.doc ---
> 343  7.1 SimpleTopic Expressions
> ...
> 357  Because the only valid TopicExpression in this dialect is a 
> QName, only root topics can be
> 358  addressed by this grammar. For those entities that support only 
> this dialect of TopicExpression,
> 359  only simple topic spaces, those that define only root topics, 
> SHOULD be used.
> --- wsn-WS-Topics-1.2-draft-01.doc ---
> 
> I think both are conflicted, so we have to modify the interop scenario

> document.
> 
> Regards,
> ----
> Mitsunori SATOMI (mailto:Mitsunori.Satomi@hds.com)
>   Director, Advanced Software Architect
>     Hitachi Data Systems Corporation
> 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster 
> of the OASIS TC), go to 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsdm/members/leav
> e_workgrou
> p.php.
> 
>